You indirectly raise a sore issue with me. That is the waiver requirements of local stations so that one can receive their or non-local HD satellite network broadcasts. In my area, only NBC has agreed to the waiver. ABC, FOX and CBS continue to deny it. I asked for an explanation and only the local ABC affiliate responded. Short answer: revenue. They claim they would be losing advertising dollars if I were allowed to watch the New York/LA HD network feeds. Hogwash. I live in the mid-Atlantic region. What is the likelihood that I am going to buy carpet in New York or LA? Plus, I subscribe to the local package from my satellite provider. It's a hodge-podge of federal regulations that, in my opinion, thwart free trade and limit consumer choice.

I think you miss the point. Broadcast networks get paid by advertisers based on Neilsen ratings which are comprised of how many people watch certain shows at specific times. If you watch an out of market channel for news you are not seeing the local advertisements so the local stations do indeed lose revenue.

That might make sense except for the fact I still receive those same out of market channels in standard broadcast. So I can still watch the out of market commercials if I choose. Point not missed. It just doesn't make sense.

I subscribe to the local package but I can only receive the local NBC and FOX channels in HD. The local ABC affiliate says that is my satellite providers fault, the technology is there but they choose to use the bandwith for 200 channels that no one watches. Local CBS affiliate refuses to respond to my inquiries and my satellite provider speaks with a forked tongue. Since I can not (for whatever reason) receive the local CBS and ABC HD feeds, I would be satisfied to watch those very few programs out of market. But unless the locals waive, I can't. So, unless I put up a roof or attic antenna (neither is feasible), I'm stuck with the SD broadcasts of ABC and CBS. Suggestions welcomed.

­Yes, I get it now. Reminds me of times around here a while back. Sinclair Broadcasting, which owns the local ABC and Fox stations, refused to let Time-Warner cable have either station's HD signal without payment. NBC, PBS and CBS (Ch 10 above) were on line from the beginning. This dispute went on for 3 years, with a growing band of early HD adopters crying fowl. Kind of reminded me of David and Goliath, only in this case both were bad guys.

Fortunately a smaller competitor to TW made peace with Sinclair interestingly enough just before the Superbowl (was it on Fox or ABC this year?, I don't remember). Of course TW lost some subscribers and eventually bit the bullet with Sinclair.

In your case, since an antenna is out of the question, then is there an option for you with a different satellite provider? Big hassle, I know. Without that alternative, you are at the mercy of some organizations who don't care. Surely you are not the only one with this problem. Is there a local HD forum in your area? We have one here.

Afraid not John. Small country town (pop. under 50,000 many of whom probably still don't know what high definition is-one guy complained that he was paying for HD programming but the tv picture was no better than regular tv-he was using the composite video hook-up. As I told King in another thread, for aesthetic reasons, I don't want an antenna on my roof.